Posted
by
samzenpuson Tuesday April 03, 2012 @05:43PM
from the class-act dept.

retroworks writes "Crystal Cox, a Montana woman who calls herself an 'investigative journalist,' was slapped with a $2.5-million judgment last year for defaming an investment firm and one of its lead partners. Cox had taken control of the Google footprint of Obsidian Finance and its principal Kevin Padrick by writing hundreds of posts about them on dozens of websites she owned, inter-linking them in ways that made them rise up in Google search results; it ruined Obsidian's business due to prospective clients being put off by the firm's seemingly terrible online reputation. After Obsidian sued Cox, she contacted them offering her 'reputation services;' for $2,500 a month, she could 'fix' the firm's reputation and help promote its business. The Forbes Article goes on to describe how she tried to similarly leverage attorneys and journalists reputations. Finding some of her targets were too well established in google rank to pester or intimidate, Cox moved to family members, reserving domain names for one of her target's 3-year-old daughter. Forbes columnist Kashmir Hill makes the case that this clearly isn't journalism, and establishes a boundary for free speech online."

I know it's a typo, but the "severe goat head" thing is rather wonderful! I imagine it giving you a hard look, with its hair pulled back in a relentlessly tight plait behind the horns and its little beard waxed to a point.

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from the consequences of your speech.

Let me tell you a joke: The director of KGB was interviewed at the peak of Soviet era. When the reporter asked about freedom of speech, the director replied: "Our country has complete freedom of speech. Freedom after speech is a whole different matter though."